CivitAI Me

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full responsibility. It only notes the token requirement and that it returns the authenticated user, but does not disclose response format, error behavior, or whether it makes network calls. Given the zero-parameter natureainer, some baseline behavior could be assumed, but more transparency is expected.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two sentences, both informative and direct. The endpoint reference adds technical precision without bloat. Slightly more could be added about return data, but it is acceptably concise.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a zero-parameter read-only tool, the description is mostly sufficient. However, it does not describe what data is returned (user profile fields) or any error conditions (e.g., token missing/invalid). The sibling context shows many civitai tools, but this one stands alone for user info. Overall, it meets the minimum but could be enhanced.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The tool has no parametersroughly the schema is fully documented (100% coverage), so no param explanation is needed. The description appropriately notes the token requirement as a semantic prerequisite, which adds value beyond the schema.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the tool fetches the authenticated CivitAI user via a specific endpoint. While it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools, 'me' is a distinct concept among the civitai_* siblings, making the purpose reasonably clear.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No explicit guidance on when to use this versus other CivitAI tools (e.g., civitai_search, civitai_download). The description mentions a token requirement, which is a prerequisite, but does not clarify scenarios where this tool is preferred or when to avoid it.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.